DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
1. In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1, 3-6, 11, and 13-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over YANG et al (WO Publication No.: WO2022142883 A1), hereinafter referred to as YANG et al ‘883, in view of Eaves et al (U.S. Patent No.: 2010/0028758 A1), hereinafter referred to as Eaves et al ‘758.
Regarding claims 1 and 11, YANG ‘883 discloses a heat-absorbing system (1A) and a method that is disposed adjacent to one or more battery cells (120), comprising: a thermal insulator (140) having capillaries (141) {as shown in Figs. 3-4: page 5 ¶¶1-5 and page 7, ¶2}; a phase change material (300), wherein: the capillaries of the thermal insulator absorb the phase change material in a liquid state through capillary action {see page 5, ¶¶ 2-5 and page 6, ¶3}; and in the event a thermal event (thermal runaway), associated with at least one the one or more battery cells that are disposed adjacent to the heat-absorbing system, occurs, the phase change material changes from the liquid state to a gaseous state in response to heat emitted by the thermal event {see page 5, ¶¶4-5; wherein a preset temperature also constitutes a thermal event}; wherein battery reaches a preset temperature constitutes a thermal event}; and a pouch (110) that includes a vapor-barrier layer (130), wherein: the pouch, including the vapor-barrier layer, envelopes thermal insulator and the phase change material in the liquid state {as shown in Figs. 5-6: page 5, ¶¶ 1-5, page 7, ¶2 and page 8, ¶6, wherein housing/or casing constitutes a pouch}; and in the event a gas pressure, associated with the phase change material in the gaseous state in response to the heat emitted by the thermal event, exceeds an integrity associated with the pouch, an opening is formed in the pouch which releases the phase change material in the gaseous state and removes at least some of the heat emitted by the thermal event from an interior of the pouch {see page 7, ¶3}.
However, YANG ‘883 fails to explicitly disclose the limitations the pouch, including the vapor-barrier layer, envelopes thermal insulator and the phase change material in the liquid state, forming the heat-absorbing system that excludes the one or more battery cells.
Eaves et al ‘758 teach: the concept of the pouch (1/26), including the vapor-barrier layer (aluminum foil), envelopes thermal insulator (1) and the phase change material (28) in the liquid state, forming the heat-absorbing system that excludes the one or more battery cells (10) {see Figs. 1-4: Abstract; ¶¶ [0007], [0020-0022], [0024], [0026-0029], [0031], [0036] and [0042]}.
Since all claimed elements were known in the art at the time of the invention, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify YANG ‘883 pouch by the pouch of Eaves et al ‘758 so as to include the vapor-barrier layer, envelopes thermal insulator and the phase change material in the liquid state, forming the heat-absorbing system that excludes the one or more battery cells, in order to suppressed a thermal runaway of the cell battery packs {Eaves et al ‘758 – ¶ [0002]}.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the YANG ‘883 in view of Eaves et al ‘758 to obtain the invention as specified in claim 1.
Regarding claims 3 and 13, the combination of YANG ‘883 and Eaves et al ‘758 disclose and teach the heat-absorbing system and the method that is disposed adjacent to the one or more battery cells recited in claims 1 and 11, respectively, YANG ‘883 discloses wherein the phase change material includes one or more of the following: H20, a salt, an alcohol, a mineral oil, or a paraffin {see page 6, ¶3}.
Regarding claims 4 and 14, the combination of YANG ‘883 and Eaves et al ‘758 disclose and teach the heat-absorbing system and the method that is disposed adjacent to the one or more battery cells recited in claims 1 and 11, respectively, YANG ‘883 discloses wherein the phase change material is selected based, at least in part, on one or more of the following material properties: specific latent heat of vaporization, surface tension, boiling point, or flammability {see page 7, ¶3 and page 8, ¶4}.
Regarding claims 5 and 15, the combination of YANG ‘883 and Eaves et al ‘758 disclose and teach the heat-absorbing system and the method that is disposed adjacent to the one or more battery cells recited in claims 1 and 11, respectively, YANG ‘883 discloses wherein the pouch further includes one or more of the following: metal foil, aluminum, aluminum alloy, heat-sealable plastic, food grade packaging material {see page 6, ¶5 through page 7, ¶1; wherein the casing constitutes pouch}, or GEE retort film.
Regarding claims 6 and 16, the combination of YANG ‘883 and Eaves et al ‘758 disclose and teach the heat-absorbing system and the method that is disposed adjacent to the one or more battery cells recited in claims 1 and 11, respectively, YANG ‘883 discloses wherein: the pouch further includes one or more of the following: metal foil, aluminum, aluminum alloy, heat-sealable plastic, food grade packaging material {see page 6, ¶5 through page 7, ¶1}, or GEE retort film; and the heat-sealable plastic is selected based at least in part on one or more of the following: abrasion resistance, puncture resistance {see page 6, ¶5 through page 7, ¶1}, or an ability to tear in a preferred direction.
Claims 2 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over YANG et al ‘883 and Eaves et al ‘758 as applied to claims 1 and 11 above, further in view of Liposky et al (U.S. PG Pub No.: 2019/0097204 A1), hereinafter referred to as Liposky et al ‘204.
Regarding claims 2 and 12, the combination of YANG ‘883 and Eaves et al ‘758 disclose and teach the heat-absorbing system and the method that is disposed adjacent to the one or more battery cells recited in claims 1 and 11, respectively, EXCEPT for the limitation of wherein the thermal insulator includes one or more of the following: a non-woven thermal insulator, ceramic wool, mineral wool, stone wool, or fiberglass.
Liposky et al ‘204 teach: the concept of the thermal insulator includes one or more of the following: a non-woven thermal insulator, ceramic wool, mineral wool, stone wool, or fiberglass {see ¶ [0116]}.
Since all claimed elements were known in the art at the time of the invention, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify YANG ‘883 as modified by Eaves et al ‘758 further in view of Liposky et al ‘204 wherein the thermal insulator includes one or more of the following: a non-woven thermal insulator, ceramic wool, mineral wool, stone wool, or fiberglass, in order to mitigate excessive shrinkage across the entire temperature range of the typical thermal even {Liposky et al ‘204-¶ [0106]}.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the YANG ‘883 as modified by Eaves et al ‘758 in view of Liposky et al ‘204 to obtain the invention as specified in claims 2 and 12.
Claims 7 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over YANG et al ‘883 and Eaves et al ‘758 as applied to claims 1 and 11 above, further in view of BYUNl (English Translated Korean Pub No.: KR102319048 B1), hereinafter referred to as BYUNl ‘048, and YASUOKA et al (English Translated Japanese Pub No.: JP 2022085086 A), hereinafter referred to as YASUOKA et al ‘086.
.
Regarding claims 7 and 17, the combination of YANG ‘883 and Eaves et al ‘758 disclose and teach the heat-absorbing system and the method that is disposed adjacent to the one or more battery cells recited in claims 1 and 11, respectively, YANG ‘883 discloses the phase change material includes H20 {see page 6, ¶3}.
However, the combination of YANG ‘883 and Eaves et al ‘758 fail to disclose the limitations of wherein: the thermal insulator includes a non-woven ceramic wool; and the vapor-barrier layer includes GEE retort film.
BYUNl ‘048 teaches: the concept of the thermal insulator includes a non-woven ceramic wool {see ¶ [0042]}.
Since all claimed elements were known in the art at the time of the invention, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify YANG ‘883 as modified by Eaves et al ‘758 in view of BYUNl ‘048 wherein the thermal insulator includes a non-woven ceramic wool, in order to facilitate heat insulation of the system {BYUNI ‘048 - ¶ [0042]}.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the YANG ‘883 as modified by Eaves et al ‘758 in view of BYUNl ‘048 to obtain the invention as specified in claims 7 and 17.
YASUOKA et al ‘086 teach: the concept of the vapor-barrier layer includes GEE retort film (see page 10, ¶6, wherein the combination of PET, ON, NY and CPP constitutes GEE retort film}.
Since all claimed elements were known in the art at the time of the invention, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify YANG ‘883 as modified by Eaves et al ‘758 in view of YASUOKA et al ‘086 wherein the vapor-barrier layer includes the use of GEE retort film, in order to facilitate the pouch having particularly excellent low temperature impact resistance {YASUOKA et al ‘086 – INDUSTRIAL-APPLICABILITY}.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the YANG ‘883 as modified by Eaves et al ‘758 in view of YASUOKA et al ‘086 to obtain the invention as specified in claims 7 and 17.
Claims 8, 9, 18 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over YANG et al ‘883 and Eaves et al ‘758 as applied to claims 1 and 11 above, further in view of YASUOKA et al ‘086.
Regarding claims 8 and 18, the combination of YANG ‘883 and Eaves et al ‘758 disclose and teach the heat-absorbing system and the method that is disposed adjacent to the one or more battery cells recited in claims 1 and 11, respectively, EXCEPT for the limitations of wherein: the vapor-barrier layer includes GEE retort film; and the GEE retort film includes a layer of polyethylene terephthalate (PET), a layer of aluminum, a layer of nylon (NY), and a layer of cast polypropylene (CPR).
YASUOKA et al ‘086 teach: the concept of the vapor-barrier layer includes GEE retort film (see page 10, ¶6, wherein the combination of (PET), (ON), (NY) and (CPP) constitutes GEE retort film}.
Since all claimed elements were known in the art at the time of the invention, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify YANG ‘883 as modified by Eaves et al ‘758 further in view of YASUOKA et al ‘086 wherein the vapor-barrier layer includes the use of GEE retort film, in order to facilitate the pouch having particularly excellent low temperature impact resistance {YASUOKA et al ‘086 – INDUSTRIAL-APPLICABILITY}.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the YANG ‘883 as modified by Eaves et al ‘758 further in view of YASUOKA et al ‘086 to obtain the invention as specified in claims 8 and 18.
Regarding claims 9 and 19, the combination of YANG ‘883 and Eaves et al ‘758 disclose and teach the heat-absorbing system and the method that is disposed adjacent to the one or more battery cells recited in claims 1 and 11, respectively, EXCEPT for the limitations of wherein: the vapor-barrier layer includes GEE retort film; the GEE retort film includes a layer of polyethylene terephthalate (PET), a layer of aluminum, a layer of nylon (NY), and a layer of cast polypropylene (CPR); and the GEE retort film has a thickness within a range of 133 - 159 m.
YASUOKA et al ‘086 teach: the concept of the vapor-barrier layer includes GEE retort film (see page 10, ¶6, wherein the combination of (PET), (ON), (NY) and (CPP) constitutes GEE retort film}; and the GEE retort film has a thickness within a range of 133 - 159µm {see page 9, ¶1}.
Since all claimed elements were known in the art at the time of the invention, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify YANG ‘883 as modified by Eaves et al ‘758 further in view of YASUOKA et al ‘086 wherein the vapor-barrier layer includes the use of GEE retort film, in order to facilitate the pouch having particularly excellent low temperature impact resistance {YASUOKA et al ‘086 – INDUSTRIAL-APPLICABILITY}.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the YANG ‘883 as modified by Eaves et al ‘758 further in view of YASUOKA et al ‘086 to obtain the invention as specified in claims 9 and 19.
Claims 10 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over YANG et al ‘883 and Eaves et al ‘758 as applied to claims 1 and 11 above, further in view of Lyons et al (U.S. PG Pub No.: 2018/0145625 A1), hereinafter referred to as Lyons et al ‘625, and SUN (English Translated Chinese Pub No.: CN 109916213 A), hereinafter referred to as SUN ‘213.
Regarding claims 10 and 20, the combination of YANG ‘883 and Eaves et al ‘758 disclose and teach the heat-absorbing system and the method that is disposed adjacent to the one or more battery cells recited in claims 1 and 11, respectively, EXCEPT for the limitations of wherein: the phase change material includes a polar material; and the thermal insulator includes a hydrophilic material.
Sun ‘213 teaches: the concept of the phase change material includes a polar material (polar solvent) {page 3, ¶2}.
Since all claimed elements were known in the art at the time of the invention, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify YANG ‘883 phase change material by the phase change material of Sun ‘213 so as to include the use of the phase change material that includes a polar material, in order to facilitate large heat absorption, shorter heating time, longer heat release duration {Sun ‘213 – page 4, Beneficial effects}.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the YANG ‘883 in view of Sun ‘213 to obtain the invention as specified in claims 10 and 20.
Lyons et al ‘625 teach: the concept of the thermal insulator includes a hydrophilic material {see ¶ [0051]}.
Since all claimed elements were known in the art at the time of the invention, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify YANG ‘883 thermal insulator by the thermal insulator of Lyons et al ‘625 so as to include the use of the thermal insulator that includes a hydrophilic material, in order to facilitate heat transfer {Lyons et al ‘625 – ¶ [0051]}.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the YANG ‘883 in view of Lyons et al ‘625 to obtain the invention as specified in claims 10 and 20.
Response to Arguments
2. Applicant's arguments, see pages 7-10, filed 05/29/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1, 3-6, 11 and 13 under 35 USC § 102(b) and claim(s) 2, 7-10, 12 and 14-20 under 35 USC § 103(a) have been fully considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection as detailed above.
Conclusion
3. Applicant's amendment necessitated the new grounds of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EMMANUEL E DUKE whose telephone number is (571)270-5290. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday thru Friday; 6:00 AM to 2:00 PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, FRANTZ JULES can be reached on (571)272-6681. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/EMMANUEL E DUKE/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3763
06/21/2026
Prosecution Insights